Nikon Announce Z-Mount 180-600mm VR and 70-180mm/f2.8 Lenses

[ilkka_nissila]

13 hours ago, bgelfand said:

If your computer is always running the CPU fan and/or Graphics Card or case fans at high speed, you might wish to investigate why before just ignoring the situation.

It is not; the only time I can hear the fan is when I am subjecting the computer to demanding computation such as raw conversion or noise reduction. The reason it is irritating is because this happens basically every time I move from one image to the next image and zoom in to 100% in lightroom. The CPU fan rapidly spins up and then a second or two later, it becomes quiet again. I would prefer the CPU fan to stay at relatively constant RPM even if it is high rather than have it spin up and down for every image. What I had done is disable the Intel TurboBoost from the BIOS settings (that means it won't increase clock speed on demand) and this meant the fan stays relatively quiet. With the HE* files it does spin up a bit but not like with TurboBoost. (There is no flaw in the computer, it was designed to behave like that. I have a similar one (though not with an i7 but Xeon) from the same manufacturer (Dell) at work and that too behaves in a similar way.) 

 

However, with my new noise-cancelling headphones I can barely hear the computer and that's great. It makes editing much more pleasant.  (The reason I use this computer is because it has one old-style PCI card slot amongst the PCIe slots.)

Edited June 25, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[bgelfand]

Which headphones did you purchase? 

[ilkka_nissila]

5 hours ago, bgelfand said:

Which headphones did you purchase? 

Sony WH-1000XM4.

[bgelfand]

Great choice. I am waiting for the price to drop around the holidays to get my set.

[Gary Naka]

If you are going to clean your computer, I HIGHLY recommend that you do it OUTSIDE.

I once cleaned a computer in my bathroom, and when I shot a blast from my canned air, a cloud of dust came up, and dust when EVERYWHERE.  YUK.  I had to clean the bathroom of dust after that.
You do not know how much dust will come out, until it does.

Next time I did that was at my wife's office.  This time I took the computer outside.  And the same thing happened.  A cloud of dust came up.  This time I just let the wind blow the dust away.

[roland_vink]

Tamron just announced a new version of their 70-180/2.8 zoom for Sony E-mount. The new lens features a new optical design with VR and a shorter focus distance. The Nikon 70-180 now becomes the second lens, after the 28-75/2.8, based on an "older" Tamron design.

[ShunCheung]

47 minutes ago, roland_vink said:

Tamron just announced a new version of their 70-180/2.8 zoom for Sony E-mount. The new lens features a new optical design with VR and a shorter focus distance. The Nikon 70-180 now becomes the second lens, after the 28-75/2.8, based on an "older" Tamron design.

It is like that again. Nikon probably want an interfior budget f2.8 zoom that doesn't quite compete directly aginst their S-line f2.8 zooms, such as the 24-70mm/f2.8 S and 70-200mm/f2.8 S.

[roland_vink]

At this stage it is not known if the new version is optically superior for general shooting. The built-in VR might offer a little more stability, but the camera IBIS appears to be pretty effective for this focal length. Also, VR does not mean the lens is sharper (provided shutter speed is fast enough), so it is yet to be seen whether the new lens is substantially better.

As for the close focus distance, Tamron states "shortened the MOD (Minimum Object Distance) at the wide end to 0.3m compared to the first-generation 0.85m". That seems to be a mistake because the this is almost identical to the first version, which focuses to 0.27m at 70mm and 0.85m at 180mm. Some reviews suggest the closeup performance at 70mm is not great.

Tamron hasn't provided any details about the optical schema; it may not be a complete optical redesign, but rather adding VR and new AF motors to the existing design. Nikon did a similar thing with their AF-S 300/2.8 - the optics of the non-VR and VR versions are very similar, almost as if the lens was optically designed for VR from the start but it took a few more years for Nikon to perfect the VR unit and bring it to market.

[ilkka_nissila]

I would not too much worry about Nikon using an earlier version of the 28-75 and 70-180 for the Nikon-branded version of these optics, there can be advantages and disadvantages to the different versions, and it may simply have taken some time for Nikon to develop their part of the lenses (motor, electronics, external design) and they used established optical formulas that they could test at the time. In the meanwhile Tamron is developing their lenses further and maybe at some point we see updated Nikon versions of these lenses if Nikon consider them needed. The purpose for Nikon for making these products available is to get lower-priced alternatives to the S-line f/2.8 zooms and have full control over the compatibility with their AF system etc. I suspect these will be quite popular as many people don't necessarily need the very best quality but appreciate the smaller size, lower weight and lower price. Anyway, this is a strategy Nikon is trying out working with 3rd-party lens manufacturers to fill in some blanks in the lens line and to have a more comprehensive system of lenses available for Z cameras in shorter time than if Nikon were to develop all of the lenses themselves. I think it's better than reverse engineered products where you might lose compatibility with the lens when there is a firmware update to the camera, and some features might not work. For example, on Sony, third-party lenses cannot work with teleconverters, reportedly. With Nikon Z, the 70-180mm is compatible with TCs.

 

I personally find these quite attractive as alternatives when lighter weight is desired but still having the f/2.8 maximum aperture which is pretty fast in a zoom. The upcoming 35-150 will be even faster than f/2.8 at the short end and the focal range makes is suitable for weddings and other types of events and may be a good alternative to the typical 24-70/70-200 pair.

Edited August 10, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[bgelfand]

Another way to use Sony E-mount lenses, both Sony and third party lenses. is with this adapter.

MEGADAP Sony E to Nikon Z Autofocus Adapter (ETZ21 Pro) – Megadap

I have not tried it; I do not own a Z-mount camera nor any E-mount lenses. The articles I have read praise it (for whatever that is worth). In a recent Tamron virtual seminar, The Fundamentals of Modern Optics, the presenters mentioned using it to mount Tamron E-mount lenses to Z-mount cameras and were positive about the results. I understand the latest version the ET-221 PRO, the third iteration of this device, corrects some of the problems encountered with last year's model the ET-221.

[mike_halliwell]

 Nikon (Tamron) Z70-180mm 2.8.  How much is it where you are?

'cos grey Nikon Z70-200mm 2.8 are the same price!

Crazy....🤣

EDIT. Not quite so bad. I'd found the price in Canadian Dollars (doh!), but for a few hundred ££s more you can get the Nikon version.

Edited August 14, 2023 by mike_halliwell

[ilkka_nissila]

33 minutes ago, mike_halliwell said:

 Nikon (Tamron) Z70-180mm 2.8.  How much is it where you are?

'cos grey Nikon Z70-200mm 2.8 are the same price!

Crazy....🤣

EDIT. Not quite so bad. I'd found the price in Canadian Dollars (doh!), but for a few hundred ££s more you can get the Nikon version.

Right, if the quality matches that of the cameralabs test, then it's probably not worth a price so close to the 70-200. But new products are priced higher initially and after a while the price can reflect more realistically what the market is willing to pay. Of course, smaller size and lighter weight can be valuable on its own, but you'd still expect very high quality wide open from an f/2.8 telezoom.

 

In my country the Nikon Z 70-200 is 1200€ more expensive than the 70-180. This will get some customers to the latter simply by being more affordable.

Edited August 14, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[ShunCheung]

To me, the one lens that can really benefit from optical VR is the 70-200mm/f2.8. For that reason I wouldn't consider the Nikkor 70-180mm/f2.8. Interesting that the second generation Tamron 70-180mm/f2.8 for Sony have optical VR now. In-body IBIS is most effective for shorter lenses.

[mike_halliwell]

3 hours ago, ilkka_nissila said:

grey Nikon Z70-200mm 2.8

£1550 .. That's roughly £1K off Nikon UK price  😉

I have the last F mount version (FL) and the FTZ makes it a bit ungainly on the Z6ii. 

I don't think the Tamron is remotely cheap enough new considering its 20mm shorter with no VR. £900 maybe?

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by mike_halliwell

[ilkka_nissila]

1 hour ago, mike_halliwell said:

£1550 .. That's roughly £1K off Nikon UK price  😉

I have the last F mount version (FL) and the FTZ makes it a bit ungainly on the Z6ii. 

I don't think the Tamron is remotely cheap enough new considering its 20mm shorter with no VR. £900 maybe?

The Z 70-200 is quite long and less comfortable to use hand-held than I'd like, also the manual focus ring is extremely sensitive and I nudge it accidentally all the time, which is annoying. The 70-180 should be easier to use hand-held in terms of shooting comfort. I guess how effective the in-body stabilization is without optical VR remains to be seen. What I'm more concerned about is the optical quality of typical samples of the 70-180.

Edited August 14, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[ilkka_nissila]

9 minutes ago, ilkka_nissila said:

The Z 70-200 is quite long and less comfortable to use hand-held than I'd like, also the manual focus ring is extremely sensitive and I nudge it accidentally all the time, which is annoying. The 70-180 should be easier to use hand-held in terms of shooting comfort. I guess how effective the in-body stabilization is without optical VR remains to be seen. What I'm more concerned about is the optical quality of typical samples of the 70-180.

I did shoot some frogs with the 200 Micro, FTZ and Z6 II, and admittedly the stabilization was not as steady as with the 105 MC, but using a small cushion on the ground I was able to get good results near the ground. I can't say how much the VR in the body helped but it did seem to help a little. 105 MC was a bit on the short side and the 200 allowed me to get some close-ups from low position with the frog a bit further away. A 100-400 would probably be a good lens for this type of shooting, but I don't have one of those.

[mike_halliwell]

20 minutes ago, ilkka_nissila said:

the 200 allowed me to get some close-ups

The sigma 150mm OS is pretty good, but the 180mm 2.8 OS Macro is more sought after..... 😉

I wonder why Nikon don't make a Z200mm 2.8 VR 1:1 Macro?

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by mike_halliwell

[ilkka_nissila]

2 minutes ago, mike_halliwell said:

The sigma 150mm OS is pretty good, but the 180mm 2.8 OS Macro is more sought after..... 😉

I wonder why Nikon don't make a Z200mm 2.8 1:1 Macro

Very low demand. Actually the 105 MC is pretty narrow at 1:1 compared to the F-mount 105 VR which loses a lot of focal length upon close focus. But the 200 is narrower.

Edited August 14, 2023 by ilkka_nissila

[mike_halliwell]

19 minutes ago, ilkka_nissila said:

Very low demand

Nikon obviously thought it was enough to make 3 iterations of the 200mm f4 macro, the last AF version is one of the few Nikon lenses that is probably more expensive now as it was when it was released.....😉

[ilkka_nissila]

57 minutes ago, mike_halliwell said:

Nikon obviously thought it was enough to make 3 iterations of the 200mm f4 macro, the last AF version is one of the few Nikon lenses that is probably more expensive now as it was when it was released.....😉

If it sold well I am sure Nikon would have made a bunch of new versions by now. I think many people find it very expensive, large and you can't really shoot plants from above as it would need to be put on a quite tall tripod. I think it is a niche lens. I use it like once in 2-3 years. I use the 85 PC-E as my main lens for close-ups, and sometimes combine with the 200 for situations where I need to get close to 1:1. For me the tilt is very useful and I struggle without it for many close up subjects such as flowering plants (I can adjust the shooting angle and control the background more easily while maintaining sharpness in the most important parts of the subject when photographing plants with tilt). However, in backlight the PC Nikkors tend to flare more and there e.g. the 105 MC and 200 AF do quite well. 

 

If Nikon did one day make a 200 MC for Z mount, I would like to see a 70-180 MC as well. I just find it quite clumsy to work with the 200 as to make a small change in the composition, the camera needs to be moved quite a lot (trashing the vegetation with tripod legs) and all shots basically have to be from subject height (eye level), which is limiting.

 

For frogs the 200 Micro is great though. When shooting those subjects I have also seen people use 100-400 lenses of various manufacturers, with and without TC.

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by ilkka_nissila